Orissa High Court
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Sampad Kumar Baral And Another on 10 January, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MACA No.452 of 2015
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. .... Appellant
Mr. V. Narasingh, Advocate
-versus-
Sampad Kumar Baral and another .... Respondents
Mr. R.P. Bhagat, Advocate for Respondent No.1
CORAM:
JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
10.01.2022
Order No.
06. 1. This matter is taken up through video conferencing.
2. Heard Mr. V. Narasingh, learned counsel for the Appellant-
Insurance Company as well as Mr. R.P. Bhagat, learned counsel
for the Respondent No.1-claimant.
3. The notice issued to Respondent No.2 owner through
registered post with A.D. on 8.8.2016 is treated sufficient in terms
of provisions contained under Order 5 Rule 9 of the C.P.C.
4. The present appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company
against the award dated 28.01.2015 of the learned 5th MACT, Puri
in MAC No.18 of 2010.
5. The case of the claimant before the Tribunal is that while
travelling along with his wife and minor son and standing on
extreme left side of the road, the offending vehicle, i.e. OR-05-
AG-3588, a white color Hyundai Getz car suddenly swerved to
the road side and dashed against him resulting the injuries.
6. It is the specific case of the insurer that the Registration
No.OR-05-AG-3588 against which the insurance policy has been
taken is a motor cycle, but not the car and the name of the owner
is also different from the name of Res No.2.
7. The owner did not come to contest the claim application before
the learned Tribunal.
8. It is seen from the impugned judgment that the learned
Tribunal though has recorded the submission of the insurer to the
effect that the registration number is relating to a motor cycle, but
did not make any further discussion on the same and concluded
with saddling the liability on the insurer to indemnify the
compensation.
9. Learned counsel for the claimant-Respondent No.1 is unable to
reply the contention of the insurer that the policy valid for vehicle
No.OR-05-AG-3588 is a motor cycle.
10. It is further seen that the insurer has adduced three documents
under Exts.A, B & C to justify his contention that the aforesaid
registration number is not relating to the car but relating to a
motor cycle.
11. Upon analysis of the contentions of the insurer which is not
rebutted by the claimant, the inference deduced is that, either the
owner of the offending vehicle has used a fake registration
number in his vehicle or the registration number of the offending
car has not been correctly mentioned. But neither of these is the
case of claimant. The Police investigation report also does not
give any light on this aspect. But learned Tribunal without
delving into the same has simply concluded with the liability
saddled on the insurer. Therefore, in absence of adequate proof
with regard to involvement of the particular vehicle in the
accident having Registration No.OR-05-AG-3588 and in view of
clear anomaly in the policy relating to the vehicle insured, the
insurer is exonerated from its liability to indemnify the
compensation. The direction of the learned Tribunal is
accordingly modified and the insurer-Appellant is held not liable
to indemnify the compensation.
12. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. However the
claimant - Respondent No.1 is at liberty to realize the
compensation amount from the owner of the offending vehicle as
per the direction of learned Tribunal.
13. The statutory deposit made before this Court with accrued
interest thereon shall be refunded to the Appellant-Insurance
Company on proper application.
14. The appeal is disposed of.
15. As the restrictions due to resurgence of COVID-19 situation
are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a
printout of the order available in the High Court's website, at par
with certified copy, subject to attestation by the concerned
advocate, in the manner prescribed vide Court's Notice No.4587,
dated 25th March, 2020 as modified by Court's Notice No.4798,
dated 15th April, 2021 and Court's Office Order circulated vide
Memo No.514, dated 7th January, 2022.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
B.K. Barik
